tv Washington Journal CSPAN October 22, 2013 7:00am-10:01am EDT
later steve latourette from the gop main street partnership. then a look at redistricting and impact on the political landscape. >> but the problem has been that the website that is supposed to make it easy to apply for and purchase the insurance is not working the way it should for everybody. there is no sugar coating it. the website has been too slow, people have been getting stuck during the application process. that was president obama yesterday on the republicans -- on the problems that have been reported yesterday on the website. he says the problems will be fixed, however, opponents like senator marco rubio, are calling for a delay in the rollout of
the individual mandate until the site is fixed. he says he will introduce legislation to that effect soon. your thoughts on the affordable care act for the first 45 minutes this morning. here is how we have divided the line this morning. if you are of the mind it should five 85-3 880.02- if you think it should be fixed but the website should continue 202-585-3881. pick the line that best represents you and be prepared to tell us why. you can also tell us why on our social media channel. our facebookl on page, facebook.com/c-span. are 34 comments -- actually, about 60 comments on the website page.
it is a poll i wanted to point you to that you can participate in this morning about the affordable care act. it is divided much like we divided the lines this morning. repeal it, fix it, or delay it. 67 so far saying that it should be repealed. 89 people waiting in that it should be fixed. when it comes to the delay, the individual mandate, only three people registering on that. 202-585-3880 for those who should repeal it. 202-585-3881 for those who feel it should be fixed. an abc news poll, people's perceptions of it, and the those participating saw a broader problem with the health-care law itself.
is adults, about 50%, say it a broader problem. -- over 80% when it comes to republican respondents. , that is a little over 50% right there bank. that is the washington post abc news poll this morning. we are what -- we are asking your thoughts not only on the website, but the affordable care act. 202-585-3880 for those who say repeal it. 585-38801 for those who say fix it. say585-3882 for those who delay it. information that was put out storyday -- there is a
adjoining it talking about another tangent to this. here is the headline "the washington times." "ruling against subsidies could disrupt obamacare." "a federal judge will decide blow a majorcan hole through the american -- through the obamacare exchanges. he said we would rule tuesday morning on the challenge for plaintiff to want an injunction on the role. he will rule on the government's on the to kill the rule government's attempt to kill the lawsuit. about three dozen states declined to create their own exchanges, leaving it to the federal government to step in and opening up the question whether residents in those states can still get the
subsidies. your thoughts on the affordable care act this morning. we start with bob, joining us from granger, indiana, calling on the line for those who say repeal it. good morning. caller: good morning, c-span. i don't think any bill that has no by porters and support at all will ever be successful -- bipartisan support at all will be ever successful. people try and act like the republicans did not support it, but there was quite a bit of republican support for them. another thing, i am really getting tired of this polling stuff. questions thate are asked, i don't care for any of these darned polls. should we get rid of the voters? host: and when christian this morning on our twitter site
saying it needs to be fixed. next from patrick from springfield, virginia, who says fix it. hello, go ahead. caller: let me see if i can get this right. aca, theking at the resistance from the republicans, it is not about a bad bill, it is more about keeping ceo's and those who were involved with that. the republicans really were concerned about the american people, instead of 42 times voting against it, they could have presented their plan, they ,ould have come up with ideas because there are provisions, plenty of them that say if you have a better idea, present it. if they are really concerned they would have done this. republicans are more about keeping old money flowing to
people on the side, raking it in. that is my comment. host: since you called in on our "fix it" line, how would you go about fixing it? caller: you could go into the private industry or anywhere, and when you start a new basically technology that has to deal with the influx of all these people, you are going to have to be patient. if it was private industry, it happens all the time. windows eight had a problem when it first came out. they put all their top tax on it , and then they -- their top tec these things.x if people can be patient it can happen. host: that is patrick from virginia. here is paul on our repeal the line from tennessee. caller: good morning, thank you
for taking my call. this thing is nothing but the first step to communism. that is all it is. this resident ain't nothing but a waste. every bill they get from the house, it never even gets attention. impeached should be just like with the president. they send money all around this world to help these countries that don't even like us, but they can't help us with the communism bill. all of these people that pushed it through in the dead of night with no bipartisan support, it is a shame that these people out -- when't got cents to it falls on its face, and it will, they will be the first ones to say it was a mistake. nobody is going to vote for it. host: hamilton, montana.
carmen, who says fix it. good morning. good morning. the guy who just called from tennessee hasn't got a clue what is going on here. this is affordable health care for all americans. my agent orange onto my children, i could not get them any insurance. now i can. we can fix anything. we are a can't-do country -- we are a can-do country. host: are you concerned about the problems that have been reported? caller: i am concerned, but it is nothing we cannot fix, pedro. we have highly trained technical people who can fix this for us and everything. i just think our health care -- i mean, they are going to give doctors incentives to lose weight, stop smoking, bring blood pressure down.
things forl kinds of the doctors and everything, but overall it will help the country get better as a whole. physically and psychologically. host: do you think these problems could have been addressed earlier? caller: when it first comes out, it comes at you like a freight train and you cannot figure out everything you have got to do, but when will we learn to tweak something along the way? i think this is good for the country. having all these huge greedy profits to big pharm and insurance companies. we are the people and we should be running the show, and i think we can do a lot better job. the republicans need to back off and let us get into this thing. we are americans. we can do anything we want to do. host: senator marco rubio , "ihing in yesterday saying
will offer legislation to delay the individual mandate to buy insurance until it gets up to speed. and is fully functional for the least -- for at least six months." [thereafter, it exempt people mandate fines if they can prove that they tried to set -- to sign up but could not because of technical or customer service issues." john join its us -- john joins us from conestoga, pennsylvania, thinking it should be delayed. good morning, pedro. yeah, delay it with the intention of keeping it. have the states that are working well like california and a few others keep going as they are going, and have the states that are having problems, or the fed's website that are having
problems, fix it. it is not a big deal. keep onrworkings will going. as far as these people talking about bipartisan support for social security, there were 18 republican senators what they passed social security. they didn't have a choice. host: the announcement yesterday also includes a call-in aspect about the exchanges used. now displays two buttons, apply online or by phone. that message is a turnaround for the administration leading to the october 1 opening to the marketplace, saying it would focus on tech-savvy young people. anthony will stop the caterer, alabama. anthony, decatur, alabama, says repeal it.
your doctorou go to and say get this affordable care, she will tell you when this happens, you are looking at at least a year before you can get something as simple as gallbladder surgery. this is what this will cost. it still has a lot of problems. i am an independent but i agree with the republican. it should be delayed for a while. host: that is anthony from alabama. a couple of tweets for you. jodi saying "throwing more money at it is the american way. why should the aca be any different?" also, "law is fine, fix the site. to reference a famous sci-fi show." an announcement by the white house yesterday on what they plan to do about it. we are using it to get your
thoughts on the affordable care act. organize the lines differently. for those who say it should be repealed, 202-585-3880. 202-585-3 881 if you say it should be fixed. 202-585-3882, if we should delay it. john is up next. caller: i was going to say with all resistance to the affordable care act, it makes sense to me from the congress' perspective, certain sectors of the business community, it makes sense to me that there were going to be some bothems in some states, with restrictions to the program and technical issues. i definitely think they need to fix it. me, wejust say that for
had to pass the affordable care act with these individual , that a lot of republicans don't like and a lot of democrats don't like. we had to go through that to get the and togs like pre-existing -- the and to pre- existing conditions. that that product would serve as a testament. thanks. host: during the white house presentation at the rose garden there was an instant that took -- an incident that took place. "the washington times" says, " caution, obamacare may cause fainting." we will show you what happened. as the president spoke at
length, a young woman beneficiary of the program nearly fainted behind mr. obama on the steps of the white house rose garden. mr. obama was talking about the hed to free families, then looked at the woman as her eyes grew wide and she cheated backwards. the man behind her talk -- caught the woman. mr. obama reached for her and said, "you are ok. this happens when i talk too ."ng ag go to the video library at c- span.org and you can see the complete presentation of the speech with that was made to the president yesterday. "delaylle, kentucky, its." this is bob. good morning. caller: hello, pedro. thank you for taking my call. the reason i want it delayed is how can anybody make an informed
opinion on something that they have not read? make these politicians read something before they vote on it. host: how long would you delay it, then? caller: however long it takes them to read it. that is the way i look at it. youign on something that have not read smacks of stupidity. i don't see how you can vote on anything that you don't know what is in it. that blows my mind. host: that is bob from kentucky. from "the washington post" -- "some key testing of the system did not take place until the week before the launch. of september 26, there have been no tests to determine whether a consumer could complete the process from beginning to end. october 1 wasat
this at launch think -- was the launch date. that was joann peterson, -- joann peters, a spokeswoman for health and human services. we know the site is working significantly better than on day one, but we still have more work to do." donald from michigan. caller: i think we should keep it until we are in the problems. if the republican party would put as much energy into trying to stop obamacare instead of trying to help the country get obamacare going and getting people who don't have insurance we willurance, i mean, only have a stronger, healthier
country. to get rid of obamacare would be, i think, crazy. host: there was a poll that we showed about people's concerns looking at the problems of the website and looking into problems of the law overall. caller: the problems with the , verye, we have smart intelligent people who should be able to solve these problems. trumpthat is donald flint, michigan. the president yesterday speaking at the rose garden said that, "the health-care law created a anduct that was affordable, it was a popular website, too." here's what he had to say. [video clip] >> through the marketplaces, you can get a health insurance policy that may be equivalent to telephone bill or your
cable bill, and that is a good deal. the fact is the product for the affordable care act for people without health insurance is quality health insurance that is affordable. that product is working. it is really good. and it turns out there is a massive demand for it. so far the national website, been visitedv, has nearly 20 million times. [applause] there is great demand at the state level as well, the states running their own marketplaces. post" leadwashington editorial. "this is the kind of annoying sideshow that president obama ought to demand accountability. we share his frustrations with
efforts by house republicans and gop governments to sabotage obamacare, but the computer staff who -- the computer snafu was due to incompetence. ,he most serious consequence mr. obama must do everything he can to erase doubts." james joins us from ohio. he says delay it. tell us why. caller: the previous caller from kentucky i think emphasized a very important problem with this entire thing. whoave an elected official has a fiduciary obligation to represent his constituents to vote on something that affects the entire nation without reading it is complete dereliction of duty. the republicans were
opposing this and trying to make people aware of the dangers of , no one totally understands what this bill consists of today. host: so you are saying delay it, why, specifically? caller: let's understand what is in the bill. whothe democratic senators voted for this thing if they understand it today. they do not understand what they voted for. no one understands what the final outcome of this was going to be. and how it is going to affect exemptingl public, institutions that are complying with it. we are exempting the congressional people from it. but yet the common people have to pay for it. but what are we going to pay for? what is the end line of this
thing? host: so you are saying read it first, understand it, and delay it. caller: certainly. how can you force people to comply with something, give the deadline, unless they know what they are going to comply with? the common people do not understand the legalities of these laws. they are so complex that the people voting for it do not understand it themselves. host: randy from louisiana, who says repeal it. caller: repeal it. like the guy just said, nobody read it. just like the patriot act. they are both doomed to fail. would never sign anything unless i read it first. i tell you what, joe mccarthy and eisenhower were right. you have a bunch of communists who invaded this country, and they are in washington. this is a scam for socialized
medicine, and it just amazes me. i just wonder how many people were intimidated to sign this thing. you have got stupidity in washington. they know what they are doing. this is designed to fail so that the government can take over the and move industry forward with socialized medicine. my insurance is going to double, and i cannot hardly afford what i am paying right now. thank you. our facebookl on page shows 120 people waiting in saying that the affordable care act should the repealed. when it comes to those saying fixed it, -- saying fix it, 140 people. four people say it should be delayed. those are the categories you can say express on the phone, on the
poll. the previous editorial talked governors who have been resistant to the affordable care act. one of those governors in town speaking at the heritage foundation in d.c., north carolina governor pat mccrory, who talked about the federal health-care law website. he also said people knew that it was going to be a failure. here are his thoughts. [video clip] >> all the publicity has been on the computer system, which everyone knew was not going to work. i have my own computer system from thebeen inherited previous administration, and i am having a heck of a time of a rollout of a statewide i.s. system for health care. when we looked at that, i said there is no way the federal government can do this. behind, everyone knew
there was going to be an operational breakdown. full circle operations. again, that is from our website. you can see it at c-span.org, urged oblation washington. sharon joins us from pennsylvania. she says fix it. caller: thank you for having me on. i think you should fix it. mitch mcconnell said many months ago that nothing obama does will be allowed, and this is a continuation of that. running around with your hair on fire because the computer lines are jammed up -- it could take a matter of days to get that straightened out, and affordable care will go on. i often wonder at these people who are so paranoid. we are going into a communist world? only because we want people who can afford health care to have health care, that makes us
communists? someone needs to refine -- to redefine the word communism. host: what do you think about the problems with the website the last couple of weeks? caller: exactly that, it is only a couple of weeks. it is not what the media and republicans are making it out to be. they are thrilled to have this problem hanging over the head everybody who wants this. as far as the gentleman from louisiana saying you cannot pass anything without reading it -- it has been years now, and i think possibly every member on the supreme court read it when they said, yes, it was a law. they have been fighting back and forth, so i think everyone at this point has read it who needs to read it, who are making these decisions. host: what do you think about the fact that the president had to go to the rose garden to even talk about this yesterday?
think it is also -- he feels the need to communicate to people just so there is a voice out there, a voice of sanity amongst all the craziness going on around him so that we can just get this job done and move on because this is just another nation's ability to move on. just keep holding us back. if the republicans and democrats had worked together since it would be a8, mind-boggling thing what we could have accomplished in all these months. what we have accomplished is near nothing because they cannot work together, like small children. i just want to put them in chairs for timeout, each and every one of them, except our president, who is working -- i with a him as a lone man
jim from stanton, michigan, says delay it. good morning. caller: good morning, pedro. i would say delay it. actually, i would like to repeal it, but that is not going to happen because it is president obama's benchmark all that he wanted to achieve for the people and all that. isnderstand the intention right, but the timing is wrong. number one, our economy is real fragile right now. the lady just referenced the supreme court, acknowledged that the law was ok to be a law. that is not entirely true. it was going to be a mandate, wasthen judge roberts, who a conservative at one point, said it is ok to be attacks. so just a cousin they greenlighted the law -- said that it was going to be a tax.
so just because they -- theghted the law exceptions to the big corporations and the people who have donated and backed president obama, while the little man is getting stuck with the bill. he is getting no opt out. he is not getting any delay, and he should be given the same delay to see how it works. we all know that the experts have been told they would need at least 40% young people to help run this thing. that is because everybody who is older and has health issues is going to be draining the system tremendously. my wife is on disability. i am a veteran, and i am a. insurance,my v. but her doctor has already told her there will not be any kind of lengthy visit. there will be a tremendous backup, and then you get into,
as everybody talks about, the vouchers and all that. that's great, but with $17 that is moreebt, dollars. "why does twitter, the president want to reinvent the wheel? , 75% approval. just expand medicare." you can talk about your desire to see it repealed, your desire to see it fixed, and you can talk about if you want to see a delay before full implementation, especially in light of problems recently reported on with the website. the reno journal talks about the shooting that took place in the news yesterday, "a tragic day" being how they headline it. an eighth grader walked to the back of the school cafeteria,
the basketball court. it was a regular day. i got off the bus and was not expecting anything, but a student with a semiautomatic handgun and opened fire outside the school and wounded two boys before killing a popular teacher, then taking his own life. the teacher and shooter were dead at the scene. this is david up next. saysrbor, michigan, who fix it. specifically how? caller: good morning, pedro. i agree, fix it. sharon said it the best. host: what would you like to see fixed? caller: it is so full of republican ideas to preserve insurance companies' profits, it is almost like health care is incidental. thingshas so many good in it, i have yet to hear one republicans say how they would preserve the good things. anybody with pre-existing
conditions is tough luck. it is ridiculous that in a civilized society like ours, we cannot join the other civilized societies in the world and provide health care for our citizens, pedro. it is just ridiculous. need theircans tinfoil hats. they do not play well with others. they walk around pontificating instead of legislating. legislate. fix it. have hearings. host: one of those hearings will take place october 30 with the health and human services secretary, kathleen sebelius. also on thursday talking to those involved in the process. you can see all that information on c-span, or on our c-span.org website. headline in "the washington
now. it has died its own death. it should be delayed. what do you think? up next.rell is detroit, michigan. he says repeal it. caller: i would like to say that it is still seen as well- intentioned. they have the affordable care act, but it is a combination of sharing 30 million people who do not have insurance, and maintaining a profit of health insurance companies. now, premiums will be raised from $95 to $600. we will see how people feel about that. the one caller said you cannot get a gallbladder operation for a year. or 300,000 200,000 could not get the operation at all.
this country, our country, can have the best parts of those plans, eliminate the worst parts of those plans am a and we could have a cadillac single-payer program
for the united states. weighing in onh collection of their records by the national security agency. alissa rubin out of paris for "the new york times" saying there was an article in le monde's -- also a story out of "the
the banks have glitches in their computers. it will be fixed and it is a good health care law. and it is a law, not just a bill. and we are going to benefit in my family from it. my husband and i are on medicare. we have had better medicare since this law went through, and i have had to wait before anything was done about health for backaited a year surgery. so that is nothing new. thank you. georgiais is kathy from , who says delay it. caller: hello? host: you are on. caller: i have been following the health-care law from start to finish, and i am a republican, but i was hoping wouldhe obamacare law roll out a lot better than it did. . am not happy that it did not
i am quite flabbergasted how it did roll out. actually, it has made me very sad. it for how long or depending on what? --ler: i think they need don't throw me under the bus when i say this -- i think they need to delay the individual mandate, and i am going to tell you why. for whate signs up they want to sign up for, if or when they can get on the page or phone line, however they are going to sign up -- i think they need people on the other end of the line, or good documentation that is 100%e accurate. can understand, information that is going to be absolutely 100% correct, and
information that is going to be secure. because it is going to be their personal data. it is going to be in the cyber world, as we all know, forever. one thing in particular i heard over the lowest -- over the last two days that i was unaware of. of the obama exchanges, that for instance, just say a disease of the stomach or other problems that a doctor may want to give you a specific stomach medicine like prevacid,r zantac or or maybe nexium. ,ell, in exchange programs these exchange programs are going to offer one drug in that classification. not the four or five i
mentioned. they only offer one. for instance, my daughter and i come if we were to enter into an exchange, we are on three different drugs. generics, sore not we would not even be will to get into any of the exchanges. family as anr with theo say information given on the exchanges, patient signing up will know, hey, am i going to be able to get my drug if i sign up for this specific exchange host:? host:that is kathy -- host: that is kathy from georgia. arkansas republican tim griffin .etiring after two terms
host: this is a last call on the topic. carrie from -- cary, north carolina. mike says the health-care law should be repealed. caller: i would like it repealed, but other colors have said it is probably unrealistic. it is probably being -- but other callers have said it is probably unrealistic. it is probably being delayed. this delay is going to come one way or the other, which is going to have to push back the individual mandate. these glitches that they are being so diplomatically called by the media and the administration are running much deeper. jan crawford from cbs news, who used to be that supreme court reporter for pbs, is a pretty honest woman and pretty straight on her news reporting, on friday
does pretty deep on how deep these problems are in terms of computer code and how widespread it is in terms of sharing information, security of information. so this is not going to be an easy fix, which they will try to do and they probably should, but it is not going to be easy. this goes to my primary point as to why this is so emblematic of big government, and why the tea party and the republicans are either fearful of it or watchful of it. that is, what private business would have done in a situation like this, whether it would have been apple, google, linkedin, ,acebook, cisco systems whatever -- they would have beta tested this in a limited market situation to debug it before they brought it online. they would have been able to test it, to see where the errors were the four they launched it. but this is not how big government does things. thegovernment does love
word "comprehensive," and that is what is leading to this conflict. we have had three years to de- bug, and after three years it is a massive, massive project. so that is another thing. as far as some of the comments being made about the republicans not having ideas, that is tiresome. i am a conservative and i am a republican. workrisk pools exist and across the state and the country for people with pre-existing conditions. health savings accounts, competition across state lines between existing insurance companies that already have websites and the ability to shop -- all of this was put on the table and was ignored. tort reform to drive down the cost of defensive medicine that doctors practice am a to order all kinds of tests so they get sued for -- so they do not get sued for malpractice. host: that is also the last call
we will take for this segment. we continue on in our discussions about politics. coming up next, we will talk about the tea party's influence on congress, especially as we consider moving forward. william galston. later on, steve latourette, a former member of congress out of ohio, will talk about the role of moderate republicans in congress. discussions those and more when "washington journal" continues after this. think that women are getting a very complex message.
women are told they have to have a great career. they have to be great mothers, they have to be thin, good looking, and they have to manage a house well. there is a sense of entitlement. i can do everything that a young man does, and that includes having a glass of wine or two after work. medicated to depression and anxiety and loneliness. i think there is a lot of anxiety in this generation in terms of how do i manage it all. so when we look at who is drinking the most -- the professional woman, the educated woman -- i don't think this is what gloria steinem had in mind. dowsett johnson, part of booktv this weekend. plus, join other viewers reading "walking with the wind" by
congressmen and author john lewis. find out more on booktv.org/bookclub. c-span -- we bring public affairs from washington to rectally to you, putting you in the room at congressional hearings, white house -- from washington directly to you, putting you in the room at congressional hearings, what house briefings. we are c-span, created by the cable tv industry 34 years ago and funded by your local cable or satellite provider. now you can watch us in hd. >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us now is william galston from the brookings institute.
good morning, sir. guest: good to be here. host: a recent op-ed has the headline from you, "the gop party and the republican crackup -- the tea party and the republican crackup." offis it important to start with that for our audience to know? guest: i claim no credit to this idea. a friend of mine and a fellow historian named walter russell mead wrote a book 10 years ago in which he talked about different political traditions in america with different populations -- there was hamiltonian american, jeffersonian american, will sony in america, and jacksonian america. my idea was to put together his definition of jacksonian america with the tea party. who are the jacksonians?
they care as much about the second amendment as jeffersonians care about the first. individualism, self-reliance. they are hard fighters, at they don't believe in wars of choice overseas. a tend to be against high taxes, but they believe and benefits that are urgent -- that are earned. this is a tradition that has existed in this country for 200 years. it waxes and wanes, and right in i argue it is erupting anger and defiance against an elite that it does not trust. host: one of the things you wrote that reflects what you say is the tea party is jacksonian america, aroused, angry, and above all fearful, in full revolt against a new elite, backed by the new american demography, that threatens its interest and scorns its value is.
guest: it is no secret the country has changed very dramatically in the past half- century. almost 50 years ago, we may does coke fundamental choices in the same year -- to open up our political system to african- americans, denied the right to vote for too long, and also to open the gates of immigration after having slammed them shut for 40 years. the first of those revolutions changed things quickly. the second one was like a time release capsule that has ,radually changed the country as people have flooded in from all over the world. searching for their own version of the american dream. this has transformed our country, and the election of president obama i think symbolizes that change. for a lot of people, that is a threatening change. america as they knew it when they grew up is gone. is not just ad it
change of demography but also a change of ethics and values, a shift toward dependency on government and away from this sturdy individual of -- individualism independence that jacksonian america cherishes. host: and the fight took place over the president's health-care law? absolutely.uest: for this section of america, obamacare symbolizes everything that is wrong with modern america and with the federal government. they see obamacare as an existential threat. this is not just a policy fight. they think that if they do not repeal obamacare, that the country will tilt irreparably toward a system of dependence on government where government benefits are used to buy the votes of people who are dependent on government, and it will become a permanent new
establishment that will have no room for traditional america. host: is it fair to say jacksonians have a high mistrust of government? absolutely. mistrust of government is more widely distributed through the american population, and jacksonians have no monopoly on it. but i think they feel it more acutely and deeply than perhaps any other group, and they do not trust anyone who does not stand up and fight against the federal leviathan, whatever the odds and whatever the concept. that is why so many of them admire politicians like ted cruz, who are dam the torpedoes, full speed ahead. i'm not interested in calculations, i am interested in stepping up the fight. he is the poster boy for jacksonian america. host: as far as what you say
about how they perceive congress and politics, what does that mean going forward, especially politically, as we saw the last three weeks with the tea party, the delay in keeping the government close and those type of issues? host: i think there -- guest: i think there is something approaching an open civil war within the republican party right now. the tea party folks and their backers, many of whom have a lot of money, are determined to reshape the republican party in completely conservative direction. a lot of the people that i will call for short the establishment republicans, are going to be on the receiving end of this push unless they stand up and fight back. i think a lot of members of the moderate conservative wing of the republican party are beginning to understand that they cannot just play rope a boxernd hope that this
punches himself out. that is not going to happen. this is a movement that is here to stay. andhey do not try to limit control his movement, this movement is going to limit and control them with political consequences that will be very unappealing in the republican party. host: the numbers will be on our screen if you want to ask our guest questions about the tea party influence. years arehe tea party jacksonian, how would you characterize the other republicans? well, corporate america is not uncomfortable with government. if you look, for example, at agenda,tform, the groups like the chamber of
commerce, the national association of manufacturers, the business roundtable, the sort of people who clustered around to fix the debt, these are people who believe, for example, that government ought to be in the business of building infrastructure -- the classic hamiltonian idea. it was the central idea of the old whig party, that party that morphed into the republican party. the head of the chamber of commerce stood up with the head of the afl-cio last year and announced their joint support for an ambitious new program of infrastructure backed by the federal government. the business groups are strongly in favor of comprehensive immigration reform, which is anathema to the tea party. other than obamacare, that is the thing they hate the most. so the agenda split between the business wing of the republican party and the tea
party/jacksonian wing of the republican party. conferenceress the head of the chamber of commerce yesterday and it policy director, and it was clear to me that they are not willing to enter into conversations with the obama set oftration on a broad fiscal issues. they are not taking a my way or the highway position. i don't think members of the tea be comfortable with business negotiators in discussion with the white house. host: they're concerned about protecting their own interests. guest: of course they are. all the way back to james madison, we do not rely on the virtue of the public spirit, we rely on groups that are pursuing their self-interest, but in an intelligent way with the
understanding there are other groups out there with their own interests who need to be accommodated. host: our guest. here is jimmy from tallahassee, florida, on our democrats line. good morning. go ahead. ok.er: i want to thank obama for helping us poor people with obamacare. the tea party -- t.e.a. -- terrible, evil americans. guest: i would say that president obama is the symbol of everything that the tea party dislikes about modern america. he i suspect privately returns the favor. this is a very fundamental clash, and i do not expected to end before the end of the obama administration, if then, and the fight over obamacare is going to
keep on going because the president is not going to back down, and neither will the tea party. caller: none of you guys are saying anything positive about the tea party. the tea party and the republicans have obstructed this president since he came into office. where is the infrastructure? where's the education i grew up on? where are the people who don't want us in this country anymore? we are tired. we want compromise. we are tired of all of this. have americans wake up. teaeed to get rid of the party and the republicans to save our americans for my grandchildren and great- grandchildren and everyone else. thank you. guest: well, you are speaking for a majority of americans. right before i entered the
studio, i read a new survey conducted by "the washington post" and americans are overwhelmingly blaming the republican party and the tea party for the government shutdown and for the loss of confidence in government and the economy. worth, isor what it's that the republican strategy on the government shutdown has accomplished something that very few political pundits thought possible -- put the house of representatives up for grabs in the midterm elections next year unless the republicans are very careful about how they handle the next year, they will be fighting for their majority. host: you really think that? what convinces you of that? guest: let me be a political scientist for a minute -- many people say the house of representatives is stacked in
favor of the republicans which it is, to some extent, not because of gerrymandering but because of the way our population is arranged and republicans are packed into the big cities and don't get congressional districts in proportion to their numbers. what that means is that democrats have to win the overall popular vote of the house of representatives by about five percentage points in order to be in a good position to take over the house. you average the last three national surveys and you come out with a democratic edge of eight percentage points. if the election were held tomorrow, the democrats, i believe, would take over the house of representatives. it will not be held tomorrow and i am fond of saying that if the presidential election of 2012 had been held in november of 2011, the results would have been different. a lot can happen and american politics and 12 month but the republicans have been put on notice. they have jeopardized the majority of the house of representatives and they will have to be smarter and the
adults will have to discipline the miscreant children a lot harder than they have in the past two months. reference the poll from "the washington post" - \ i rest my case. from westland, michigan, republican line, good morning. caller: how are you doing? i love the conversation but i belong to the tea party. i am a republican but i was just listening to the lady and i am a terrorist and an economic this and that. i have to say that the woman is talking about saving her grandchildren and their prosperity. our unfunded liability, social
security in this country is 126 trillion dollars in debt. are approaching $17 trillion in the united states national debt and it is over $60 trillion. who is saving whose grandchildren? i don't think the republicans should set and try to repeal this obamacare. there's one way to get rid of it is to have a super majority which, the way they passed it, would be called tyranny of the majority. it's absolute nonsense. i don't want to see the republicans -- i thought paul ryan, his healthcare plan, is the same social engineering as the democrats. it will not work. i would go more to a system where people can let the private sector run it. there are plenty of organizations out there that do good. whoever would call me a
terrorist and this goes for the republicans and the democrats, they have caused all this monumental insane debt. who is going to fix it? the republican party is at odds with itself and that's fine because there needs to be new idealism, these people on both sides need to be kicked out of their offices for derelict shouldn't of duty -- dereliction of duty. i don't want to see obamacare repealed. it can't be fair to say that every part of that bill is bad. i would take the good parts of it and work with it and try to better the bill. i don't want to see the thing repeal but it will surely not do it everyone said. it will not ensure the entire country. what do you think the tea party accomplish over the last three weeks? caller: i don't think they a copy anything. i don't think the democrats either. i am tired of both sides closing the government down.
my little girl is 11 years old. i think if her class could have worked a deal, they could have worked a deal better out than these republicans and democrats. well, that is one of the best defenses of the tea party that i have ever heard. if the entire conversation were conducted in that spirit, we would be in a much better place and be a much stronger country. then we are now. for the record, if you read my article, there is no name- calling whatsoever. ofm not in the business calling members of the tea party terrorists. as a matter of fact, my article represented my best effort to understand the tea party, who they are, what motivates them, what they believe, what they want for the country. by theeally struck juxtaposition of the two most recent calls.
both callers sincerely believe that the country is on the road to ruin unlessx it happens or y happens the. the problem is that x and y are not the same. they are diametrically apprised. oppose. we have a fundamental debate about the path for the country to produce jobs and prosperity and opportunity for the next generation and the generation after that. we will be gridlocked until this discussion is resolved by a majority or a super majority of the american people. host: temple hills, maryland, good morning. i was: good morning, listening to your concern about the tea party. i am a vietnam vet. i have seen a lot of changes in this country. is stople have to do
blaming one another. there is enough blame to go around and i need to sit down and compromise. we just complicate problems. to concentrate on the simple problems that america has. america will never be lily white again. everybody needs to sit down and just work together for the benefit of the whole country. it's simple. we just complicate things. have a great day. from one vietnam you're a veteran to another, let me thank you for your comments. i agree completely about the need to sit down. a few years ago, a group of people got together -- i was one of them -- to found a new organization called no labels, a grassroots organization of democrats, republicans, and independents dedicated to the
proposition that it's time to stop fighting each other and time to start fixing the country. if you're interested in finding out more, you can go to nolab venueg but we were the for the only serious bipartisan discussion going on in washington during the entire period of the government shutdown and there will have to be a lot more people in organizations trying to do what we were trying to do in order to bring this gridlock to an end and get the government functioning. host: how do you see that playing out in the house-senate budget conference that is about to start? guest: in most religions, despair is a sin and i am commanded to be hopeful for the budget conference. goalsch is that if the are defined modestly, that an agreement can be achieved, if we
are still reaching for the grand bargain, i doubt very much whether december 13, 2013 represents an achievable target date for that grand bargain but i do think that if you put together president obama's budget proposal and chairman paul ryan's counterproposal from a couple of weeks ago, within the four corners defined by those two proposals and the senate-budget proposal come i think there is room for a serious discussion. i think mr. ryan is not going to press for some of the more fundamental changes that he had in mind in past years. ishink president obama willing to compromise on issues such as social security and medicare. here is the problem -- andthe white house
senatormurray have taken the position that without substantial additional revenues, no agreement is possible. thehe same way that president will not compromise on obamacare right now, the republicans will not compromise on new revenues right now. their position is that president obama got his revenue increase at the beginning of the year to the tune of $660 billion and they have drawn the line, no more. they did that under duress and i don't think they will yield any more ground. it remains to be seen whether progress can be made subject to those constraints. if it can be, i am confident it will be. host: well those constraints produce a tea party or jacksonian way of producing -- of getting rid of those roadblocks? guest: i don't know what will happen but i know there are substantial factions in both political parties that object to the terms of a possible compromise. liberalit remains to be seen whr progress can be made subject to
those constraints. democrats put the administration on notice that they don't regard the proposals in the president's 2014 budget submission particularly as regards changing the indexing formula for social security as being negotiable. they want those off the table in the same way the republicans want taxes off the table. host: new bedford, massachusetts, democrats line -- i just wanted to make a about what was said about the tea party people being jacksonians. he is so right about this country. the republicans really need to wake up and smell the coffee. this is no longer like a white america. ones, with these
foreigners, with black males and what happens to them in this country with different drug laws and stuff like that -- and all these private people invested money, those in prisons, for people to go to jail, especially my type of people, black and brown -- we are tired of all of that. we are tired of our grandchildren looking forward to a future that is a dead end. he is so right. they need to wake up and come together. and sit down with the president and work all this out. this is a different america now. do is well, all i can repeat what you just said. god's honest truth that this is a different america now. what are we going to do with this new america? how are we going to make it work for all of
us? that's the fundamental question. i will not sit here and say i have all the answers or the brookings institution has all the answers or any political party has all the answers. that's the fundamental question. i agree with you. america has always looked forward. nostalgia is a part of our experience but it has never been the great driver of change in america. it is hope rather than nostalgia. i think that american spirit of looking forward is alive and well. after 40 years of open inigration between 1880 1920, we were a new country and we made that new country work. we won the second world war with that country. we built postwar prosperity with that new country. we can build a great 21st century america with this new country. but it is not going away. host: an e-mail --
that's a very good question. i not going to sit here and pretend i know are all the funding for tea party backers is coming from. i do know this -- between theplit now big business community and small business, independent business. the agendas of these two private sector groups are very different. an open split. among other things, big business has been willing, since 2009, to make its peace with obamacare. small business has not.
big business is strongly in favor of comprehensive immigration reform. me where smallto business stands on that. big business can afford to deal with new regulations. corporations don't like new regulations necessarily but they have the wherewithal to absorb them and deal with them. for small business, new regulations strike them as an threat, a matter of life and death. ismy analysis, the tea party not a party and i put these it's a statistics in my piece, they don't represent the downtrodden. they have more education a most americans and higher incomes than average americans but these are not the corporate leaders. foundersthink, are the owners operators of small
businesses who think that government does nothing that helps them and does many things that hurt them. host: from another viewer -- well, i think all americans support constitutional government. we have been arguing about the meaning of the constitution almost since the day it was enacted. one of the things i do at brookings is study the thought and history of people like james madison and alexander hamilton, the two principal co-authors of the federalist papers and they turned into the founders of two opposing political parties by midway into george washington's administration and meddlesome and hamilton had a huge fight of thehe interpretation constitution.
i am for constitutional government and i think all americans should be but the question is, which constitution? as for the debt, it is not unconstitutional but it may well be unsustainable. those are two different issues. host: there is a piece in "forbes." guest: well, i know this gentleman very well, he is extremely intelligent and very thoughtful conservative. say thatt's fair to the more government we have, the more occasions there are for policy conflicts. that is not necessarily an argument against more government
but it is an argument that you can have more government and political tranquility at the same time. given the fact that we have more government than we did 100 years ago, a lot more government than 200 years ago, and very few americans are in favor of rolling the clock back all that attacked someagan of lyndon johnson's great society and never took a run at the fdr new deal. i think the government conceivably could be a few percentage points smaller than it now is that we are not going back to 1920. we have to learn how to work politically with the size government we have and, despite all these fights, we have to figure out how to make our political system work. we have no choice. walker, louisiana, republican line -- caller: good morning.
let me correct you on big business. regulations love because it is a barrier to entry for upcoming competition that cannot do the paperwork. congratulations on your " wall street journal" gig. i'm glad i canceled my cistercian before you got there. you wanted to imply the tea party people are basically racist because the president is african-american. feele you really don't that way. hopefully, that is just a tactic you use to belittle the enemy. establishment types like you are on the run. the crazy conservatives and libertarians have joined the grassroots movement. they are behind the constitution , they are not jacksonians. they are constitutionalists. it will be rough going for you establishment types. thanks a lot. guest: two points -
number one, read my piece. you will replay the tape of this conversation and i think you will not find that either said or implied that members of the tea party are racist. an point of my piece was effort to understand, quite frankly and sympathetically and accurately as i could what the convictions are about the and what's happening to it that drive the tea party movement. a lot of conservatives have sent me e-mails saying thank you for writing that piece. you got the tea party right and this is a fair-minded effort to understand it. as for the tea party having the i wouldon the run, "" washingtonhe post survey, the details of
which error host read on the air a few minutes ago. -- our host read on the air a few minutes ago. the tea party is just about the most unpopular group in america now. only 11% of americans belong to it and only about 1/4 of america has any sympathy with it whatsoever and the republican party could very well the a permanent minority if the tea party takes it over. if the tea party manages to nominate one of its preferred candidates for the 2016 republican nomination, i predict we will have a replay of 1964 with lyndon johnson against barry goldwater. , thatng as a democrat prospect thrills me. host: what did you learn about the tea party and what makes them tick? the most important thing i think i learned was their
sense of what the stakes are in the fights that have broken out since the beginning of the obama administration. believed they country is at a tipping point. mr. romney famously referred ,uring his campaign to the 47% the people who are dependent on government and will never vote for republicans because republicans want to take away some of their benefits. i think there is a perception that drives the tea party that if obama care is here to stay, the 47 becomes the 53% or so and the game is over. and that an ever more intrusive federal government is our future and that's not a country they want to live in. " obamacare" se is an existential threat and i mean that as a way of capturing what is driving this movement.
some people dismiss them as crazy. i don't do that because given their premises, their conclusions about obama care and the political stakes follow logically. we need to have a discussion as to whether we really are this wed of negative -- whether are at this kind of negative tipping point we are -- we think that we are at. i don't think so but there is a sophisticated version of that argument but it is a fear that is out there. host: barbara , from florida good morning. i guessgood morning, i've got a few issues. my grandfather came over with a fig tree on the back of a boat from italy and came here to take advantage of what america offered at the time, the opportunity to grow and make a living. i don't feel the country is racist. i think it is now divided
between the people who want the freebies and the people that still have the ethics of becoming an dependent on their own making their own way, having their own self-worth. careems the freebies don't that they are giving up their own self-worth and the opportunities. i see it more that i have been doing -- working through the aarp doing taxes free for some people and it seems almost that the country has -- the government has gotten to the point where they are almost advocating people not to get married. if you're not married but you are living together, you can both claim head of household and have as many kids now that are becoming commodities instead of people wanting children for family so they can get more freebies. i am not sure.
as part of the tea party, yes, it's good. the democrats to me are just taking advantage for the votes to get freebies out to get the votes. host: thank you. well, in my experience most people who are getting with the caller called freebies are actually not very satisfied with that situation. every time jobs are advertised in any major city across the country, you have thousands of -- or a fewg up for dozen or a few hundred scarce jobs. it is not my view that the work ethic is dead in america or that there are lots of people who are comfortable living off the government their entire lives. either way, it's it's a lot harder to live off the
government for your entire life that was before the welfare reform of the mid-1990s. it is the case that people with lower levels of education and skills are having a much harder time finding even entry-level jobs in this new america than 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago and that is a huge problem in this country. we are all going to be poorer if we cannot find a way of training and then enlisting the skills of all the americans who want to work which i believe is nearly all of them. i guess the caller and i just have a different perception as to the american spirit which i don't think is dead. as for the tax code favoring unmarried people, that is absolutely correct. that has been a long-running problem, the american tax code. a bunch of us have proposed
remedies for that problem and it turns out to be very difficult to get them and acted. -- and acted. as to children being moneymaking commodities, that strikes me as the equivalent of the famous dialogue in the movie " heablanca" where rick says has come to casablanca for the waters and is told that there aren't any and he says i must have been misinformed. people who say they will make money by having children don't have very many children because children today are much more expensive to raise than they ever have been before and no level of government benefits will compensate for that. host: this viewer says -- well, my view is it would be a repeat of 1964. is theone like ted cruz republican nominee, we will get
a chance to find out which of the two of us is closer to being correct. host: one more call from upper marlboro, maryland, democrats line. caller: thank you very much. i have a few questions for your just to ponder. -- from your guests to ponder. from the glitch in obamacare, whereyone looked into president bush in 2004 became involved with the company canada andted cruz is a canadian the canadians would like to have this pipeline running through america. if you look at the root of the problem, if obama had agreed to the keystone pipeline, he would have a much easier time.
there is so much i agree with you about. there was the woman who talked about people wanting to live off a government. if you look back -- i am an elderly person -- if you look back in the 1930s and 1940s, black people especially, and mexicans by coming into the country, had to be tenant farmers. they had no social security, no hospitalization and had to go to a general store after working al l year and get what the owner said they had earned. you might get $100 for the year. host: what would you like our guest to answer? caller: what does he think? all of these people talk about the constitution. i have a small copy of it and it is a very hard read. i don't believe they would know
one word of the constitution. well, there is something new everyday. first canadian conspiracy theory i believe i have ever heard. you have made an important addition to the lexicon of conspiracy theories. i doubt very much that is the root of the affordable care act's current implementation problems. that the system was never even properly tested before it went live on october 1. don't know of a lot of private-sector software engineers who would have chosen the timetable and the procedures that the administration employees to get it in place. i don't think we need conspiracy theories to understand why this
new system is in big trouble and why president obama had to go to the rose garden yesterday and deliver a 27 minute defense of the affordable care act's implementation. host: from yesterday, talk about the future of the tea party, where do you see it going? i think they will fight very hard. i don't expect them to yield ground. to see not be surprised a lot of primary contests between tea party-backed candidates and business establishment-backed candidates for the business committee is gearing up for a fight after not fighting for a number of years. and 2016,in 2015 there will be a struggle for the soul of the republican party. the tea party is going to be the pioint of this beer on that argument. you can find his article
on the brookings institution website. we will continue our conversation about moderate republicans next. later on, a viewer suggested topic -- we will look at gerrymandering. more on the rollout of the affordable care act -- florida republican senator marco rubio speaking earlier on fox and friends criticize the obama administration for what he says is a lack of transparency on what he refers to as obamacare. he said he thinks what they are worried about is increased criticism of the law if they all it up and show people the ugly things going on in the implementation. he added there has been no effort to provide details about efforts to fix the site. is at the white
house today and there is word this hour that public tours of the mansion which were canceled earlier this year because of budget cuts are set to resume next month but on a limited basis. tours will be allowed on average of three days per week, down from five, and will continue through january 15 next year. this is according to the secret service. the nation's largest oldest civil rights group has reached out to a former house of representatives clerk to temporarily take the reins. thataacp announced lorraine miller will take the lead during the search for a permanent leader. she served as the first african- american clerk of the u.s. house of representatives from 2007- 2011. the president of the naacp announced last month he will step down at the end of the year. she is said to assume day-to-day responsibilities on november 1. those are some of the latest headlines. >> c-span's student cam video
contest asks -- what is the most important issue congress should consider in 2014? documentary- make a in the competition is open to all middle and high school students for the grand prize of $5,000. this year, we have doubled the number of winners and total prizes. entries are due by january 20, 2014. visit student cam.org for more information. >> " washington journal" continues. >> our guests served in from 1995-2013 and now the president and ceo of the main street partnership. for those who don't know, the main street partnership is -- >> it was the john quincy adams society. such luminaries with us
and others and it has been a sleepy little group that has supported senate republican candidates across the country. we are now going to actively defend and recruit people to run for office. host: what type of people, moderates? guest: i have them as normal. everybody has a litmus test. we have while one question test and we ask our respective candidates if you believe that president obama was born in the united states. if they answer yes, they are in. host: what do you mean by gearing up? guest: the party has taken a lurch to the right. the tea party element of the republican party is an important part of the party. the tea party is not the
republican party. the republican party is made up of a diverse mix of individuals and certainly all the tea party has currency in certain areas of the country you're in new england, it is not the force it is in texas. party,r to be a national it's our believe we have to represent the entire country. host: as far as what we saw over the last three ways, what did we learn about moderates during the shutdown? thet: i was proud of moderates in congress prayed if you look at the 87 republicans that voted to reopen the , 40 of them are members of the main street art ship. they are the governing wing of the republican party. they just need to feel their oats. these folks will take the position that is principled based on what they've believe in what the districts have asked them to do and come in and be blindsided by some of these big money groups.
they will run these manchurian candidates to get through the republican primary but they might not make it in the fall or if they do make it, are not interested in governing. host: as far as your efforts going forward, our their races you are looking at specifically? hardly ake simpson was moderate in idaho, conservative member, close associate of speaker john boehner. has launchedgrowth a website. is running forn the united states senate. there'll be another one in west virginia. before last isek that there are a couple of seats in the michigan where a couple of people in the business community will step forward and challenge some folks who may not fit host: those district. untilest is with us 9:00 15 a.m. -- 9:15 a.m..
here are the numbers -- you can also e-mail us or tweet us. who in your mind best exemplifies moderates in the current house? guest: charlie den to is the leader of the tuesday group who is pretty outspoken. the fellow that stood up and away i had had not seen before and i'm proud of him is the senator from california. we come from parts of the country you expect us to come from, the mid-atlantic states, pennsylvania, ohio, new york print i wish we had republicans who represented new england but we don't anymore. going back in time, people like mike castle. he is a good example. he is a good member of congress and pretty conservative when it came to fiscal issues but he was taken out in the primary by a
woman whose commercial started that she is not a whispered that should not not be the face of the republican party. that race, the nevada race, the caused thee republicans functional control of the senate by nominating people who don't have a chance because of their stream views and instead, we see the control to the democrats. i would argue that harry reid would not be the majority leader today if we had not adopted that strategy. host: as far as the speaker from your state, speaker john boehner, what's his relationship with the tea party but those who identified them as moderates in the house? guest: john banner is a good friend of mine and is the speakers speaker. he try to get along with everybody within the caucus and season is his job to execute the the plan he has been given by his caucus.
the thing that struck me a week ago tuesday when he came up with not one but two plans save these folks from themselves and they rejected it. when they rejected it, you are left with either a continuing government shutdown or you have to yield to a deal that has been worked out by mitch mcconnell and harry reid which is what happened. he tried to give them opportunities to get something but not this high in the sky thing. anybody that things president obama this morning is going to and say obama care really stinks and i am willing to get rid of it tummy tuck. that was not reachable. what he was trying to do was limit expect haitians. thes get what we can and do best we can as he did with the fiscal cliff what his goal was to save as many people in the country is possible for getting increased taxes rather than setting up these things that make nice upper stickers at
rallies but are not obtainable. host: why did you think he took that strategy about the affordable care act? guest: he was instructed to do that. did hisnator cruz filibuster or whatever it was in the house floor, that became the number ofbre for a members in the caucus. it was 30-50 who said they will not vote for anything unless you make this the central piece. he saidlected leader, we will follow the strategy even though they did not believe it. john boehner said this is not a good strategy. he attempted to execute it. it was shown to be unsustainable. he then tried to come up with some things like the medical or issues where
republicans do well. we do well on fiscal issues but we don't do so well when we delved into these other areas. he made it clear that he was not going to let the government default on its obligations. he is a statesman for keeping his word even though he is receiving criticism for that. host: our guest is talking about the role of moderate republicans in congress. from dayton, ohio, democrats line -- caller: i am a she. you are talking about moderate unfortunately,, the moderate republicans have been led around by the nose by a fraction of the tea party group who did not really go there to legislate. they went there to obstruct and bring down government. they are leading not just the republican party but john boehner by the nose. unfortunately, that's not how
government works. they need to work within the tocess set up in congress direct laws that are broken or they don't agree with or address their agenda and not do things like shutdown the government because they are not getting their way. john boehner let that happen. teat those crazyloonie party rights to push the ball further down the line. he was really following the lead of not the republicans, the moderate republicans, but the tea party and that's not really how we get legislation done. i don't agree with the first premise. the second one is right. the way this should have been handled as anybody who thinks the affordable care act is a perfect piece of legislation is not accurate. we see it playing out on the front pages of the papers today. the way to deal with it would have been to say that these are the problems and these are the
good things. the ability to have a young person stay on their parents plan until they are age 26 the medical device tax. get rid of the bad things and go towards improving the law, that should be the function of the congress. i could not agree with you more. this leading by the nose business -- john boehner did everything within his power to have this go the way that it should go. the way the house of representatives works is that if you cannot muster 218 votes for something, it does not work. the democrats answer is just throw it open and let all the democrats to it with a handful of republicans. that is surrendering the functional majority of the house of representatives. that is not something that is palatable to me and not palatable to john banner. when mrs. pelosi was the speaker of the house, she did not
operate in that fashion. there is a reason that the majority has a certain power in the house of representatives. is correctid, mason there is 30 or 40 conservative house republicans who are not yielding. the one thing that struck me -- i was here for the government shutdown in 1996. newt gingrich and bill clinton either met in person or spoke everyday on the telephone. when you have a president who says i will not negotiate, that gives john boehner few options. he can either capitulate and say on are right and let's move or he can attempt to make changes. he did everything in his power to make changes with the cards he was dealt. host: from twitter -- guest: not at all. that's what kills me about this thing. when i talk about reaching common ground, there are segments on both the right and
the left that call that surrender. going to cave in and give in to the other point of view. that's not what it's about. in a constitutional republic which we enjoy, when one party controls the house of representatives and the other party is in the majority in the senate and the white house happens to be controlled by a democrat at the moment, you have to find ways to work exam. surrender would be one way and i or't advocate surrender acceding to anything the president and harry reid want to do but, likewise, a bargain and negotiation is you get something, you give up something, and you find the sweet spot. people unwilling to do that are not interested in my opinion in governing. we are talking about this government shutdown -- the 800 pound gorilla that continues to haunt us is the debt and lack of changee
and then title of programs that will he does allow -- that will eat us alive. the partisan democrats say don't touch a hair of social security and medicare. leave them as they were. if the republicans say we are not going to give you one dime of revenue when we operate the government on income levels relative to gdp that were used in 1959 -- you know what? everyone can say no but then the country will go to helena handbasket and we have to we have to have people who are willing to ask that we get out of this mess. host: sounds like the budget conference. guest: i was there for the supercommittee. this really points to the problem -- the supercommittee only had 12 people. i think this thing has 40 so i am expected to go better. 12 people got together and their task was to find $1.3 trillion
in reductions over 10 years. that is $130 billion per year. that'sthe federal budget $3.6 trillion. it is chump change. they could not do it. when they couldn't do it, we got sequester. and you get sequester, everyone screamed about that. undoneer will not be because all that would do is pretending there is not a problem. rather than saying the sequester thing, all programs are not equal and some defense programs are more important than other programs, rather than saying we will work this out, they are saying sequester stays in place until i get exactly what i want. i don't have high hopes for this budget committee. host: rochester, new york, republican line. caller: i thank you for your efforts. problem is that the talk
radio guys are leading those republicans around by the nose. are talking about 30 or 40 people. guyslimbaugh and those advances themselves by dividing everything and causing a crisis. the other day, tom coburn was on tv and he said the media loves to stir up a big crisis or problem and then you tune in to theen about the stuff about crisis, you have to hear about the crisis. that theaugh says media, he tries to blame the media but what people don't realize is that rush limbaugh is the media. he is not in danger, he is the danger. forget that talk
shows on the right and the left, these people are entertainers and are in the business of selling advertising. they are really not in charge of either the republican or democratic party based upon what their ideology is. york, aster, new moderate republican, jimmy walsh serves in the searches area and as for a long time and democrat who was head of the banking committee when i was here -- these are two men who knew how to put aside their sharp differences and find the common ground. i don't know if talk radio and entertainment is the problem but what is the problem are these super pacs that are ideologically driven on both the right and the left. what they have the ability to do is come in with millions of dollars in a contested democratic or republican primary and skew it. you saw there it -- you saw it
during the fiscal cliff in the shutdown. when john been a rolled out plan the and rolled out the two plans tuesday on things the republicans could get in exchange for reopening the government, heritage action, club for growth, freedom works all send out alerts to whoever they send out alerts to saying that we will score this vote and if you vote this way, we will give you a double secret and what thatte translates into if you are primary inis uh oh, my district and on the other side a translates into primaries for democrats. you need to go to the last election and look on the democratic side. there was a member of congress from hershey, pennsylvania, tim holden, in the congress for 20 years and a good guy, former sheriff, would work with you but
he was truly a democrat. because he did not support the affordable care act, they took him out. you have this on both sides of the aisle. when that is the makeup of the congress, if you been taken out or if you've taken somebody out that wanted to find common ground, god forbid you should find common ground and work with the other side. had new figures in for the economy -- 148,000 jobs added in september the unemployment rate falls to 7.2%. what does that mean for moderates and tea party jobs going forward?> everyone's good but says the economic recovery is fragile and it is. republicans should be more about implementing tax reform that further spurs economic growth and create jobs. we need to find those things
rather than fighting about the things we have been fighting about. host: next call is from denver, colorado, go ahead. caller: thank you for being on. if you remember, the one thing from the continental congress that they got done with that they agreed to meet again. maybe we could have a panel discussion one morning about meeting again. about how theg tea party was a wrapped in. i wonder if you think that could because of the irs targeting. maybe there is a backlog. is a it is not that there lot of tea party types out there but you have 10 or 20 million that have been frozen for however many years and now they are starting to get their ducks in a row. i think to demonize the
tea party is not accurate. if you look at what the tape artie, the -- if you look at what the tea party stood for originally, it was about taxes. i just retired in january and i had a lot of tea party chapters in my district which is outside cleveland, ohio. 99.9% of the people at those meetings were wonderful human beings and americans who just wanted to deal with the size of government and the high level of taxation. i am all on board with that. drive messages that have nothing to do with taxes and economic issues and individual liberties and freedoms and sort of pollute the message and become the poster child for what the tea party is -- that lets the opponents demonize it and it does not move forward our agenda.
the tea party is a valuable component. most of them are republicans and tea party members and the republican party, we value them but they are not the republican party. the republican party is built upon individual liberty and freedom and a reduced size of government. if you want to believe that, we be welcoming anyone who wants to be a republican. senator cruz appeared on tv this weekend talked about going forward and the fight against obamacare. [video clip] pushing tou rule out the brink of another shutdown by fundingou would block for the government unless obamacare is defunded? >> i would do anything and will continue to do anything i can to stop the train wreck that is obamacare. i intend to continue standing with the american people to work
to stop obama care because it is not working and is costing people jobs taking away their healthcare. isst: well, the sad reality that the only thing that is more -- that is less popular than the affordable care act is the way the republicans dealt with it. senator cruz can continue to but in theposition constitutional framework we find ourselves, it's not going to happen. is not going to abandon his signature piece of legislation and harry reid will not let that occur. improve the law to get at the things the senator is talking about? if the president has already delayed the employer mandate and if you look at this mess with the enrollment, it's a reasonable argument, i think, to say maybe we should delay the rollout and there is no business
i'm aware of that would have gone into the field with a computer program that they had not tested from start to finish. not take advantage of the difficulties to advance your position rather than staking out a position that is unattainable? that would be a loser. from newnext is alice jersey, democrats line. caller: thank you. please don't hang up on may. me. when you first came on i thought you were a moderate. in the time i've listened to you, you are no better than mr. cruz who is a christian dominion us. to say nothing like this has ever happened in our government there and for you to say president dug his heels in -- what did you want him to do? they wanted to overturn has election.
unsign hisim to legislation? otherhing you have said than if they believe he was born in the u.s., then we will back them -- that's wrong. that is wrong. my ritual question was going to have a majority and if this is supposed to be a minority of people in your party, why didn't anybody step up? where were these moderate republicans? record, il, for the cannot hang up on you. i could not disagree with you more. -- you havely not not added anything constructive. to say this has never happened before, it's happened 17 or 13
times since the 1970s were people have had differences in the government has been shut down. and if i was not clear, i was not suggesting that the president needed to undo or get rid of his signature piece of legislation, the affordable care act. what i said was that the law was not perfect. 1996u go back to the 1995, shutdown, bill clinton and newt gingrich worked it out, and that means one man gave a little bit and the other man gave a little bit. and that is the way the process is supposed to work. the president say i am not going to talk about anything, i'm not going to negotiate on anything, is just as non-constructive as senator cruz saying he is not going to negotiate until we get where -- rid of obamacare. like most things, things are in the middle. as two, where were the moderate republicans?
a moderate republicans advocated the reopening of the government. but again, if you have a side that says, just reopen the government, no strings attached, don't make any changes to the affordable care act, don't reduce spending, don't do anything about entitlements, don't do anything about tax reform -- that is surrender. that is not negotiation, either. i understand your position. you are in new jersey. and new jersey is a pretty blue state, so i guess i am not surprised. host: governor christie does well in new jersey. is he a moderate? guest: he is a moderate. to find that? guest: what the finds it is the recognizing that government -- if you want to be about the business of government, you should be about governing. and governor christie has recognized. let's take what happened. the supreme court decision on new jersey saying gay marriage could start yesterday. now, he doesn't believe that that is appropriate, his personal set of beliefs, if i understand him correctly.
but he also recognizes that to continue to fight that through the court system, through appeals, is futile and a waste of resources at this time. so, i imagine he will go back and then there will be some sort of referendum in new jersey where the voters make that decision. that is governing. ands not taking your ball going home and saying, well, i disagree with the decision and therefore i am going to shut down the government or i am not going to talk to anybody. host: bella asked you -- why is it ok if democrats can fight sequester which is law that we cannot fight obamacare with the same intensity? -- we can't fight obamacare? guest: both things are appropriate but the government did not get shut down over sequester. if you look at what democrats are trying to do, they are attempting to replace sequester and republicans are resisting, it as they should. sequester is the first time we have had a reduction in spending of the federal level for three years in a row. i think it is an unfortunate weight came about.
the reason why you elect people is to make decisions and you say, let's cut this 20% and this 15% rather than everybody getting a 10% haircut, a stupid way to do it. but if democrats want to fight the sequester, that is their right. if republicans want to oppose the affordable care act, that is their right. it is the way that you do it that i have a problem with. and what senator cruz was attempting to achieve is not achievable. i would like to be wearing a size 32 pants again, but that is not going to happen in the foreseeable future. likewise, it is unrealistic to believe that president obama is just going to abandon his signature piece of legislation. from harrisburg, pennsylvania, on the republican line. good morning. colorcode good morning. thank you for letting me speak. i just believe that -- colorcode good morning. thank you for letting me speak. i think the republicans should reach out to the black community
and also the minority community because the democratic party hasn't has let them down big time. they have done nothing for us but made us dependent on government. out that theint wave of the democratic party has not benefited the black people. and you should reach out more to us because it you will not be able to win an election unless you get the minority, most of my marty's in your pocket. thank you very much. i will listen to you off-line. rose, you know what? you hit the nail really on the head as to what this is about. in the republican party today, there are two distinct views and visions. after the 2012 election when the president was reelected, you may remember that the national committee of the republican party put out a 58 page taper that said that in order to do better in national elections, we
need to broaden our appeal to different voters. specifically talked about hispanic outreach, african- american outreach, and others. is you what is going on have a group of members in the republican party who think that the reason the president was reelected was because we did not go far enough to the right, and they would argue, if you look at the difference in terms of who showed up in 2012 and who showed up as opposed -- in 2008 m of the 3 million very conservative evangelical, tea party, whatever you want to say, those voters who voted for john mccain, did not show up for mitt romney because mitt romney was only a squish an establishment candidate. and they would argue if we could just get those 3 million people to the polls, we would you let the next president in 2016. i don't happen to believe that. i happen to believe that the path to getting the next president -- republican statesnt in the united
is by having african american vote for republicans, gay americans vote for republicans, asian-americans over republicans ,an -- women, for god's sake need to go for republicans. if your coalition on election white made up of angry 57-year-old from below the mason dixon line, i would say that it's not a winning strategy to elect a president. i cannot agree with you more. but that is the discussion. and by saying that, i am not ridiculing the people that have a view contrary to mine. they believe in their hearts. but we've got to start -- sort that out as a party. that is a family matter we will be discussing. host: the big tent idea is not a new concept as far as the party. guest: it certainly isn't. if you look at the seat ever presented way back when, my seat was represented by a man named joshua gettings getting, forefront of the abolition movement and he wore a medallion
that said millions for defense and not a penny for slavery. he pushed the republicans and abraham lincoln to get where we needed to be, unfortunately in the civil war. but that is the heritage of the republican party. it is governing america. and it is including all americans did not governing. that way andost now we just want to represent you if you agree with us, to me, it is deflating. and it is more than deflating because i am 59. i have been a republican my entire life. people will -- and i am surprised that has not happened -- people will say, you rinos come a you this or that. host: there was a tweet. guest: of course. but that is so counterproductive and the flies in the face. if you don't agree with me, you have to call me a name? that is pretty sad. host: joan from akron, ohio. for steve latourette. myler: thank you for taking
call. i would like to ask mr. latourette what is the real tea party? what happened? was it abouttea and taxation -- -- and they threw the tea in the boston harbor. that is what i was four. these people, this tea party, they carry flags with the snakes on them, yellow shirt, brownshirts, and flags. the bible says the last generation will be a generation of vipers. those are viper snakes. you better low who -- know who you are laying with. now the new tea party people, they give them green shirts. the rate of exchange of our money around the world is the standard. it is called a greenback. the last horse to run is that pale horse, read it in the bible. guest: i hope it is a lovely day in beautiful akron, ohio. the snake, i do have to talk
about the snake. the snake is not something the tea party came up with. the yellow flags, most of them say don't tread on me, which was actually a flag that was carried by american patriots during the american revolutionary war. and it was a message to king -- king george the third, don't tread on me, taxation without representation. i don't have any problem. i don't know about the biblical onnificance of don't tread me flags. but they are rooted in our history. and i think, as you point out -- and i think i said before -- when the tea party focuses on economic issues and taxes and things like that that engage -- impinge individual freedom, their resident messenger message resonates with a lot of americans -- republican, democrat, independent. when you ask what happens -- only in my opinion -- the tea party, 99.9% are just good, solid americans who want a better country for themselves and their families.
-- when you have a successful movement, you find other people who don't have real successful movements sort of infiltrate and begin to look for that soap box that gives them some attention. a lot of the people who are driving the tea party message today are not really republicans and they are not really just tea party, they are libertarians. paulare the rand paul, ron libertarian wings -- which, again, if that is what you believe, that is what you believe. of it is that sort "government is the enemy" view that really has gotten, in my opinion, this movement in some trouble with voters. host: in your state the pushedr, john kasich, through expansion of medicaid monday over objections of fellow republicans. is he a moderate? guest: john kasich would really
get mad at me if i said he was a moderate. what john kasich is him and he is a guy who governs. you go back in time, you only had one balanced budget in recent memory, and that was a result of the balanced budget act of 1997 that john kasich, newt gingrich, bill clinton crafted together that let us pay our bills and actually pay down the deficit for a period of time, did not reduce it to 0 -- kate down the debt. -- paid down the debt. that could not happen today. john kasich is very much a conservative but he also says -- and he is a realist and he is a federal -- fellow who wants to govern -- saying, look, we have uninsured people in ohio, we have billions that will be made available to the state of ohio to cover our uninsured. why did we do that? the reaction on the other side -- if it was a decent argument on the other side, i would sort of perk up and listen. the argument is -- it is a
bumper sticker, a sound bite. that is obamacare. as if anything related to obamacare is poison. if you go near it, you are going to die. that is a bad view. so, i give john kasich, the governor of ohio, high marks, and chris christie and stick -- and scott walker in wisconsin and other republican governors who say, you know what? i don't like the affordable care act or a lot of pieces of obamacare, but in this instance, if this helps people in my state get access to health care, why wouldn't they do it? host: bradford, pennsylvania. frank, republican line. good morning, steve. i am and 87-year-old republican. i have been an investor. i can tell you that health care -- business, has chased many startups in the country. i remember when we were making resistors. i can remember disclosing the
plants from moving to singapore -- and they were by the thousands in ohio, pennsylvania, north carolina, because i was there. over hereerican men to show them how to run the plant, and when they came back to their jobs, they were gone. they left doing business in america. and it was because of health care. they will not give people health care. and we have the same thing with whirlpool. they left. i remember the plant in indiana. it was health care. we have the lousiest health care in the world for business. things -- two things. i would add that the current tax code and its treatment of corporations in the united states is a definitive -- is a disincentive. we have one of the highest tax rates on corporations in the
world, in the developed world anyway. and i think that that is a driver. and at the end of the day, people who are involved in business, as they are shareholders, the obligation is to the shareholders. and obviously it is to make money. what we have lost this sort of fine with that, a recognition of social justice and the people who work for you are assets and valuable, too, so they need quality health care and pension programs and other things, and maybe we shouldn't just be driven by the almighty dollar. with that at its core, where i completely agree with the people that say that the affordable care act is not good and obamacare has problems is that it was designed it -- i mean, it was sold as something that was going to lower the cost of health care on people that have health care. and if you like your program, you could keep it. and if you think about it, you don't need to be a rocket scientist to say, how are you going to insure 30 million new
people and it will not cost anybody anything? it just does not make any sense. an eight year old can figure that out. and so, what you are seeing -- to your point -- you are seeing people who are receiving -- for instance, the law firm i work at, mcdonald hopkins, health care is going up 28%. it is not all because of the affordable care act and a lot has to do with the affordable care act. it has some problems. host: last question about congress. joshua says -- and many have pointed to the hastert rule as the problem. you were close to him. would you think about the role now? guest: i wasn't that close to speaker hastert -- was to speaker boehner. but the hastert rule -- you remember a fellow named tom delay, the whip from taxes and then the majority leader -- they have sort of an underwritten role that you could not put legislation on the floor that cannot get a majority of the
majority. so, in today's environment, if you have 240 republicans, unless republican100 and 21 signaling they would vote for legislation, you were not supposed to do it. some people have misinterpreted the hastert a role to indicate you can't put something on the votesand less you get 218 -- that is not the hastert will. some of these men and women who were sort of sand in the gears of government are saying no, no, no, we can do it unless we can pass it with republican votes only. that is not hastert rule. i do not know that it is the problem. is problem in my opinion that -- going back to mrs. pelosi. you go back to the four years that mrs. pelosi of california was the speaker of the house. she got through the affordable care act, cap and trade, dodd- able to do it was
by twisting arms, breaking arms, and getting 218 of her members to support the legislation. what these 30-40 republicans have yet to realize is that when you deny john boehner, speaker of the house, a functional majority of have 218 votes, you only have a couple of choices. you have deadlock and government shutdown, or he has to pick up this folder, go across the hall on bended knee and say to mrs. lucy, who is now married -- minority leader, -- to mrs. pelosi, minority leader, saying i need some of your votes. anyone who thinks the bill will become more republican if he has to go to the minor -- to the minority leader to get votes, is crazy. what they need to recognize is governing and achieving and moving forward with legislation is getting the attainable. it is not surrendering, not being a squish, that it is saying, here are the goals that i can get with the senate and the white house being in control of the other party, and i need
to push the ball as far down the field as i can and not have some stupid idea. steve latourette, former member of congress and also president and ceo of the mainstream partnership. on the program, we have a segment who was suggested by a viewer -- the topic is gerrymandering. our guest, david wasserman from the cook political report. first, a news update from c-span radio. >> more on the affordable care act from florida republican senator marco rubio. in remarks earlier on cbs "this he says he is about to introduce legislation to delay the penalty people would pay if they do not buy health insurance under the new law, adding people should not be punished for not buying health insurance when major technical problems have plagued the online sign-up process. the senate reconvenes next week. you can watch live coverage
gavel-to-gavel on c-span2. coming to the jobs numbers, the labor department says jobless numbers fell to 7.2% in september from 7.3% in august as employers added just 148,000 jobs. the report was delayed to one half week because of the government shutdown. while cbs news's white house correspondent tweets about noon densmore never showing unemployment among whites, 6.3%, blacks, 12.9%, hispanics, nine , andnt, women, 6.2% teenagers, 21.4% unemployment. turning to amnesty international, they are calling today on the u.s. to investigate reports of civilians killed and wounded by cia drone strikes in pakistan. the group is releasing a report today that shows a new details about the alleged the thumbs of the attacks.
c-span radio is covering that even. you can hear more about it on today"- on "washington program that starts at 5:00 p.m. and you can hear remarks from the pakistani prime minister this morning at 11:00 a.m. eastern on c-span radio or watching the event on c-span2. those are just some of the headlines on c-span radio. videopan's student cam competition as what is the most important issue congress should consider in 2014 question mark make a five-seven minute documentary showing various point of view and including c- span video. it is open to all medical and high school students for a grand prize of $5,000. this year we doubled the number of winners in total prizes. entries are due by january 20. visit student cam.org. >> "washington journal" continues. viewersom time to time,
like you will send suggestions or segment and we will take them and actually turn them into a segment. that is a case for our next segment. the topic is gerrymandering. the viewer who gave the --gested -- suggested suggestion is john middleton. mr. middleton, why did you want to send that suggestion? are you there? let's try one more time for mr. milton. thanks for joining us. why did you want to learn about the process of gerrymandering? i have been watching various media, including c-span, the last several weeks, the discussion of the deficit and the tea party came about. and i got a very clear impression from the media that thingmandering was some new and azeris and invented by the tea party and that is how they got to be so care -- powerful. i did not think that was the case. it is not new at all. and so, i just thought it was
very interesting, the media's portrayal of-- gerrymandering and actual history being very different. host: how long have you been interested in this topic? caller: 50 years. i am an american history major, so i have always been interested in it. things youabout the have learned either watching the network or your own study, what have you learned and what do you think would be of interest to our viewers who watch the program will maybe do not know the extent you know what? is ar: gerrymandering long-standing american tradition. not one that we are necessarily -- that we necessary -- necessarily should be proud of but it has been there a long time, going back to the era of the founding fathers. eshaping districts to sort of get the voters that one party or
nts has been around for hundreds of years and democracy seemed to have thrived nonetheless. host: john middleton, i do not know the state you are calling from but what is your state and do you see the effects in your own state? caller: i am calling from florida. yes, if you just look at the map, you certainly do see some unusual-looking shaped voting districts. but then again, the population in florida is sort of quite skewed toward the coastal regions and it is very sparse in the middle. so, it is not entirely unusual you with the odd looking shaped districts. i am not really an expert in the florida districts per se, but i don't have the impression really that one party or another or one faction of a party is really
getting an unfair advantage. middleton, we have a guest to talk about the details of gerrymandering. what is the one thing you would like to learn in the segment? like toi would understand better how districts are shaped and reshaped and who really makes the decision and every 10ing does the year census have on it. span: john middleton is a c- viewer and suggested the segment for today so we will oblige him and talk about this discussion. a few, first of all, for the suggestion and i thank you for calling in. caller: thank you for having the segment. host: if you at home want to give your own suggestion for segments we can do in the future, you can do so. @www.c-ail is wjviewer span.org. joining us at david wasserman from cook political report, the editor for activities in the
house. you heard mr. middleton talk about his interest. it started a beginning bid is gerrymandering? guest: mr. middleton is absolutely right. it is not new. back in the 19th century, --ernor oakridge jerry gerry you aridge district that connected political town for gain. it is a municipal debt manipulation of political boundaries for partisan or other gain. i heard somebody say lord of the flies on steroids, and it is a uniquely american law, some might say, and our political system. --er single-member district redistricting to update where people live and draw equal political districts as a bureaucratic function that is relatively non-controversial. it is absolutely a partisan game that is played by
both sides. both sides in various states of doing it, but predominantly in the last round of districting in the 2010 census, it was republicans who were able to gain the most political advantage and win more seats in the house even though fewer votes for congress. host: talk a little bit about the process. what goes into the steps of changing the political districts within a state? guest: every 10 years we get and we need tota update political boundaries to reflect not only changes across state lines and apportion seats among the states, but also to redistrict within states to reflect where people have moved. yearss done every 10 after each census. we just went through a round of redistricting in 2011 and 2012 following the 2010 census. here i some states were party control could change in the middle of a decade and certain parties will see fit to
reevaluate their lines in the middle of a decade. this is quite new and controversial. in texas, tom delay, who was then majority leader of the house, republican, did not that is not like the fact that texas was mostly republican state that elected mostly democrats in the house and into thousand four republicans in texas and junior a new plan that eliminated a lot of the democratic seats and gave them -- engineered a new plan that eliminated a lot of the democratic seats and gave them what is now a 2-1 majority. host: are the decisions made by state legislatures only? guest: no, actually, that is a good question. in 30 some odd states, i think by theistricting is legislature -- it is controversial because voters believe they should choose politicians as opposed to politicians choosing voters. the largest state that has a non-partisan commission is
california. in california -- and california implemented and reform in 2006- awayfor the 2010 -- to get from the state legislature which would democratic and put it in a commission which was made up of several partisans but also several independent citizens and they were prohibited from taking into account the residences of incumbents and any partisan data in drafting lines. the result was you had lines 12 sets of incumbents into the same districts so they have to find new districts to run. for a lot of incumbents, it was very challenging. you saw whole lot of turnover in california and the 2012 election. host: our guest is here to talk about the process of gerrymandering and politics. if you want to give us a call, it is -- can tweet us to an
e-mail firstname.lastname@example.org. you have given us a map of north carolina to help in our discussion. here is the map. what do we see? axiom of partisan gerrymandering is the goal is to have -- north carolina was republican's ac state and 2012. they could take a map that elected seven democrats and six republicans prior to redistricting and engineer a map that would elect up to 10 republicans. they ended up winning nine seats. all what they did in this map was to employee to age old tactics of gerrymandering, hacking and cracking. foring is a term used trying to pack as many of your opponents voters who overwhelmingly democratic district -- districts as possible. you see the snake like like the 12 district from charlotte to .he greensboro area
overwhelmingly democratic seat. you see the fourth -- the fourth district, raleigh-durham area triangle, north carolina. we have had districts and other states called the upside down praying mantis -- like rabbit on the skateboard. the goal is really to pack as keep theour opponent's compones rest for yourself. the other tactic is called cracking. in western north carolina, there is asheville, which has become increasingly liberal. it has become a source of democratic votes. what republicans were able to do , in two different districts, as to dilute the voting strength of democrats. it worked with great effect.
district is west of the state. from a pretty moderate blue dog, retired after the republicans read through the lines. mark meadows, even though he is a freshman congressman, was the republican who circulated a letter around the house that got 80 signatories that essentially urged speaker boehner and republican leaders to pursue a strategy to shut down the government and less obamacare was defendant. this is a real world example of how gerrymandering can have a legitimate impact on the way we deliberate policy. host: we want to give you the opportunity to talk to our guest . the number is on your screen. honolulu, hawaii, jean, democrat line. good morning.
i am very concerned. have aii, we do commission that does the appointing. however, the people who appoint the commission members are legislators. because they are appointed by it is nots, we do see objectively. the legislators have a great deal to say about who is going to be selected. is -- somehow we have to take it away from the legislators of all the states. host: thank you. guest: a lot of voters are
frustrated even if you move to a commission system, you cannot entirely take politics out of the equation. we see this in a lot of states like arizona or new jersey who have moved toward a commission system of redistricting in the last several decades. a lot of nonpartisan, good government reformers would say that we need to move toward commissions. in fact, in states like these, we have still seen gerrymandering because there are political appointee serving on his commissions to work as emissaries from majority leaders and state legislatures and so forth. you actually end up with curiously district did the states.ed in new jersey, democratic state, you ended up with a map that thefited republicans do to vagaries of the commissions. it is not necessarily a cure-all but what california has done is unique. california gives hope to a lot of reformers.
the byzantine lottery system through which the commissions were selected really did take politics out of it, largely. there are still elements were certain members of congress lobby before the commission to preserve communities and similar districts and so forth. overall, california really did u n gerrymander and create a complex set of districts. a viewer says -- are a lot of academics out there. i should say a small number of academics, perhaps, who are working on creating computer it isredistricting where just kind of a simulation of what would happen if all you did was read district boundaries around to reflect the changes in population. in other words, why not let a computer draw the map and set leading us to partisans to have their own agenda. what academics have found is even the distribution of the
democratic electorate across the country, it is so concentrated, given my president obama only won 22% of all counties in the country even though he won 62% of the electoral college. even if you play the game of redistricting roulette, republicans will still end up with a natural advantage because of the distribution and concentration of democrats in suburban areas. host: michael, massachusetts, independent line. host: good morning. you partially answered my question just now. it seems logical to me that something like this should be a legal. are there any laws against doing this? guest: that is a great question. this is something that courts have deliberated for a long time without coming up with a surefire answer on the question. there are all kinds of groups, for example, the fair districts florida group in florida, and that passed ballot initiatives
to try and constrain legislators'ability to gerrymander. there are courts have taken exception with the kinds of abstract art-like shapes with the legislators produce and yet in the 2006 supreme court ruling involving a case in pennsylvania, the supreme court ruled that while gerrymandering and partisan gerrymandering in were justiciable, subject to court review, they could not identify clear standard by which to adjudicate whether imap map was a partisan gerrymander or not. so to speak, it is very difficult to draw the line. host: you talk about shapes. there was a set of shapes and thereew york times," or is pennsylvania, 5, more shape like a "u." what goes into -- what is the process of producing the shape?
we have increasingly sophisticated parts -- software that both sides used to draw the shapes. back in the 1970s and 1980s, we still had a lot of gerrymandering but you had to do it by attaching huge maps on the wall and literally carving out districts. it was a very tedious and time- consuming process. i 2002, we had software that was very capable of splitting census maximize achieve and partisan map. we saw something new in this in 2012,redistricting which is the applications the insiders used were available really for the first time to a broader public on some websites where you had applications that individuals who weren't necessarily on the inside of the political realm could use --
host: like on the phone. guest: not quite, that would be difficult, but there is a website where you can actually download real census data, download a map and come up with your own set of districts. we had a lot of citizens who are a all kinds ofs vi applications to various commissions. few of them actually had a real impact on the process. as far as what the insiders were using this round of redistricting, the software they employed was so sophisticated that they could not only simulate what would happen in the 2012 election under a certain set of lines or a scheme they created, but they could demographict the shifts would be in the next decade to ensure their map would last until 2020 and still be effective than. host: new jersey, and dependent line. we are on with david wasserman.
caller: thank you. the california example you gave, in new jersey, we have a governor elected strictly because he went after corruption. in the 1990s we had a republican wave of elected officials because they promised initiative and referendum to give the people the option of what california has. have point is the people been so put down as far as political involvement, and new jersey is horrible. you cannot do a thing in the state without politics interfering. my question is, how does new initiativethrough and referendum's so we can get back our state? the caller is talking about a lot of different moving parts.
new jersey isn't actually as severe a state in terms of gerrymandering as others. in fact, under new jersey's commission system, you have six democrats, six republicans appointed to a congressional redistricting commission and then a 13th tie-breaking member who is appointed by the chief of the new jersey supreme court. in this past round, the the former attorney general named ton farmer and his role was take proposals from both sides of the commission and decide which one was more fair for the state. what he ended up deciding was that the republican plan more fairly drew districts across the state. the results is that even though you have a state that obama won overwhelmingly about 2008 and 2012, the congressional district split is 6 republicans and 6 democrats. host: next, houston, texas, democrat line. caller: hello. in texas, there
are certain districts that are on the federal guideline. i am concerned that if the fed had to get involved, how legal is it? i'm trying to understand that. guest: texas is the most complicated the most litigated state in congressional redistricting. the reason is that republicans control the state heading into the 2012 cycle of redistricting. 2000-2010,ween minorities, mostly democrats, had accounted for 90% of the state's population growth during that decade. the question was, texas was districtour new because of the population growth, but how do you apportionment fairly within the state? at first the republicans and legislature drew a map they give democrats essentially only one new seat out of those four, gave -- created only one new
effective hispanic majority district. a lot of latino groups said it actually took one latino district opportunity away. the net impact of their proposal was no new opportunities for latino or presentation. the department of justice, which 5 ofat time under section the voting rights act which has since been struck down by the supreme court, objected to preclearance of the map and resulted in a link the federal trial. -- link the federal trial. less aas more or compromise map in time for the 2012 election that created an additional latino majority seat in the dallas/fort worth area. the problem and the challenge in texas is that the active for dissipation among latino -- participation among latinos is a much lower than their share population due to the youth of
their population and also the ancitizen factor that even in district in dallas/fort worth that was about two thirds latino and population, you ended up having an african-american candidate who was able to beat a latino candidate in the democratic runoff for that seat. there's no guarantee of additional latino representation in the house. host: north carolina, republican line. morning, mr. wasserman. i am a resident of north carolina. i have been here for a little over 30 years and certainly interested in redistricting since i was in junior high school. i drew a map in junior high school. my particular interest has to do district heh pointed out earlier on your map. that goes back over 20 years and was the result of the preclearance from the voting rights act being applied to majority districts in north carolina. i am wondering now since section
5 has been overturned, do you think this will be an interest toward going back toward more contiguous and compact districts? particularly because north carolina has asked additional requirement that counties not be divided. the provision has been ignored under federal court. your opinions on that, please. guest: this is a very well- informed caller. the county nesting provision that north carolina has mostly applies to the state level of legislative district in. at the congressional level, the interpretation of the supreme court rulings in the 1980s led to the proliferation of these african-american majority seats in 1992. the important distinction to make while republicans gain a national advantage from the 2012 round of redistricting, really, the genesis of this polarization
in the south was in 1992 when courts forced the creation of minority/minority sees that packed african-americans into districts that just the 12th district and the first district use in north carolina. there was an old joke about the 12th wristed and it is to look worse than that that you could doorsn i-85 with both car open on either side and be in three districts at the same time because literally at points along i-85 from the district only went along the median strip. it used to be worse than the map showing right now. which is hard to believe. in 2012, the publicans maximized their partisan advantages in addition to crafting and keeping those african-american majority seats, divided the rest of the districts in such a way that they would have a natural advantage. you can see across very is portions of the map they did not have much regard or county contiguity -- four county contiguity.
there's not a whole lot of optimism. result?at will be the guest: that would be very, very difficult to create, particularly in states that are very lopsided one way or the other. as i alluded to before, democrats have a simple geography problem beyond the fact that republicans were in charge of redistricting and somebody states in 2010. thanks to cell sorting, democrats won 1.4 million votes wonhouse in 2012 and only 201 out of 4500 districts. there is a robust academic debate over whether that has to do more with gerrymandering or has to do more with voters redistricting with their feet, essentially self sorting into like-minded committed these. it is true we have more lopsided counties in neighborhoods than ever before.
according to my research, 70 seven percent of counties with a whole foods market voted for barack obama in 2012 and a late 29% of counties with a cracker barrel old country store voted for barack obama in 2012. this is a cultural gap that is driving a lot of the polarization we're seeing in right now. host: democrat line. go ahead. thatr: i wanted to comment not only does the gerrymandering affect the national legislature, but it also severely affects state legislatures. i know in kansas there were that congressional districts were fixed so that a moderate republican or a democrat was moved out of their district and they had to move and then there was a lot of fuss about this person doesn't really live here, even though they own property in this area.
so it is really pretty detrimental to the minority party in the state like kansas. to dividea big push the democrats in kansas so that there wasn't any way a democratic congressman could be elected. guest: kansas is actually the very last state to put in place the congressional map in 2012 because even though republicans controlled all levels in kansas, they disagreed amongst themselves over exactly how to draw the states congressional districts. faction in the republican party of the conservatives who dislike the moderates. that has really driven a lot of the rancor in her district in there. there are residency issues that come with redistricting in
gerrymandering. in many states you have requirements that state legislators have to live in the districtand vote the they represent. if you have partisan gerrymandering, that removes an incumbent from their district and essentially forces them to move or in some cases to take up sham residences. in one case in california, we have a multimillionaire state senator who has purchased a one bedroom apartment without a dishwasher in a neighboring town so she can continue to represent the state senate district where she was elected. we see this from state to state. interesting fact about the last 10 years and this has been driven by gerrymandering and mid decade redistricting, there are 10 places in the country that had been represented by 5 different congressman in the last decade that has set the record for turnover. whether it is in georgia or new texas, a place like
you've had certain communities that have been through the ringer things to excessive wave elections and redistricting's that have cleaved essentially income is from familiar voters and caused a lot of confusion. host: while the viewer makes the comment -- columbus, ohio, independent line. caller: good morning. this is my personal opinion that gerrymandering is just as illegal as the way they scrub the voter registration list so that you can't vote and you have to go back and really take a look at where it comes from and who started it. it really started back when the boat of pine years came over here from europe. came over here from
europe. the queen let those people out for freedom. people don't realize the first boat load they came over here were released from prison. they were really the worst of the worst that we would put in our address. the first thing they do when they came over here was killed the indians and take over the country. now the dna is exposed of the tea parties from the billionaires to those who live in the trailer camps -- host: caller, thank you. guest: there's a lot to consider. about the last round of reduced just -- redistricting. i look at the shutdown and i think, is the republican led round of districting we saw in 2011 and 2012 acres disguised as a blessing for the republican party? theylicans really ensured
could win a majority of house seats, short of a lot of their members. 10ur estimates, they saved to 12 districts they might have otherwise lost in 2010 by gerrymandering in states like pennsylvania and ohio. token, they essentially purged a lot of democrats and minority voters from their own districts to the point where the average republican district in the house were from 72% white to 74% white, and republicans and the house are still 89% white men whereas democrats are 47% white men. to republicans have a coalition in congress that is reflective of the country? heading into 2014, there are questions about whether that has created an image problem for the party that has its roots and how the lines are drawn. host: tennessee, republican line. caller: and my on? host: go right ahead. caller: look, i would agree with
david wasserman. i'm not a big fan of cracking. he gave an example. i am a republican and opposed to cracking. i want you to talk about kansas and nebraska, oklahoma and utah, arkansas and massachusetts. they are winner take all. there ought to be a safe republican or democratic district in the five republican states i mentioned. is, i thinkto say what is wrong with drawing districts based on population, i mean, i am all for competitive districts. areasout areas where the that are safe democrats have saved democrats, there are swing areas. encompassed in the area should be swing districts. host: thanks, caller. are several
delegations in the house that are entirely one party or the other. in those states, yeah, for the most part, it would be possible to draw at least one district the opposite party would have a chance of winning. how do you get there? the problem is, by large, the states are controlled by very partisan legislatures that want to maximize their political otherage and leave the side without any opportunities whatsoever. the effect is to exaggerate the strength that one party has in a given state. voters in massachusetts are democrats. the democrats control 100% of the house delegation for massachusetts. the opposite is true in a place like kansas or nebraska. if you did have nonpartisan or perhaps bipartisan redistricting omissions, maybe there would be -- commissions, maybe there would be more seats and maybe
that would be a good thing. host: independent line, new jersey. caller: it has been over 100 years since the size of the house of representatives has been increased. if they were to use the same formula they used then, there 545 members of the house of representatives. you would not eliminate gerrymandering, but you would certainly make it more difficult to eliminate majority/minority districts. guest: well i'm a that is a question -- well, that is a question that has been raised in may be worthy of some debate. the average congressional district includes about 700,000 people. that is a far cry from the earlier part of the last century when there really was an opportunity for members of congress to get to know constituents on a more personal level. time or is itot
cost-effective for a candidate to go door-to-door. it is more cost-effective to spend all day on the phone raising money so you can air advertisements to a congressional district of 700,000 people. if we increase the size of the house, the problem is, voters when given the question of do you want more politicians, would probably say, no, when you phrase it that way. host: mike, el paso, texas. go ahead. we're running close on time. caller: does the number of people in the district make a difference as to gerrymandering itself? i see democrats that represent 100 plus thousand people and republicans represent maybe 10,000. how does that play? guest: actually, all districts
by law at the congressional level, at least, have to be equal in population down to the person, unless you're talking about a state that uses whole counties in cobbling together districts. in those cases, maybe there is %. allowed variance of 1 when you get into the mandate relation commutator precinct, say on the south side of houston that has 10,000 residents but produced only about 200 votes in the last election, or an area that has a high proportion of nonvoters. what we've seen in places like texas is republicans as a strategy taking those precincts and putting them in their own districts so as to take potentially good areas for democrats away and add minority voters to a district without having a massive impact on the partisanship of those seats. last call, new mexico,
independent line. we have about one minute left. go ahead with your question or comment. a second issue you really have to take into consideration is the role of citizens united. the ability of a wealthy contributor to run a candidate that may otherwise not be appealing to that district. which you comment? commit maybe outside influences overall -- well, maybe outside influences. has sorting, gerrymandering driven polarization, a third is the rise in straight ticket voting. influence of the outside groups on the electoral process. after citizens united, there has been a spike in the amount of outside groups spending. it may not have the kind of impact a lot of people are talking about. a lot of people are very worried that would lead to certain candidates and sides being able
to overwhelm the other. what i've seen increasingly in the elections that i have covered is that if a candidate would otherwise have a legitimate shot at winning a seat but doesn't have the resources to do it, they haven't been good at fundraising, then an outside group will come in and spend on their behalf and host of taking credit for a victory. in some respects, it has leveled the playing field. host: this e-mail -- guest: well, you know, it is next to impossible to find a state where you could draw all districts to be of the same partisanship and all districts to be competitive. in addition to fewer and fewer swing neighborhoods in county, we have fewer and fewer swing states that we used to. redistricting and gerrymandering at a partisan level compounds
lines,oblem by trying separating democrat and republican voters neatly and preventing the kind of swing districts from preserving their numbers in congress to the point where we would have our competition. the number of districts we rate as competitive between our plus has and d plus five declined from 164 in 1996 we are talking about a fit of the house as being potentially competitive thanks to the gerrymandering that compounded the problem. think you. our next event that you can see live event on c-span, they are announcing their survey results on employee benefits.